If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

When it comes to my department's use of force, in the end the only way we can use a firearm is to throw it at the perp. We have to take into account where the bullet might land including the possibility that it might go through a wall(the fact that we use hollow points sorta defeats this purpose but we do use rifles that use FMJ which can go through walls). The fact that they built my jail so close to a residential area means that if an inmate is escaping, we really can't shoot at him because we might miss and hit someone in the apartment complex or the development on the other side. At least we're not at bad as Trenton State which is right in the middle of the hood.

I feel your pain. When the DOD first floated the idea of decorating people for "courageous restraint" and changing the ROE so that you practically had to Mirandize the Taliban before you could engage, I knew that the PC had reached critical mass.

Originally Posted by Articulate_Ape

Have you ever been tasered, Nova. I'm just curious, I don't know why.

Is there such a thing as a taser fetish? :wink:

Originally Posted by Adam Wood

Words mean things. Less lethal, not non-lethal. And tasers are not a defensive weapon. Their specific purpose in the world of law enforcement is to inflict a shitload of pain to bring someone into compliance. That is most assuredly a very offensive weapon.

The reason that there are more cases of police using tasers is that fewer police are beating the holy fuck out of someone with their PR-24:

which is the alternate method that police have at their disposal to bring someone into compliance.

What do you expect them to do to get someone to comply? Throw kittens at them?

What? And get PETA all upset?

We can thank Rodney King and the LA rioters for the increased incidence of tazing and the decline of nightstick techniques.

Which is why a taser was implemented in the first place. Of course lost on the nova's of the world is if the woman would have stayed still and accepted responsibility for what she had done, she'd still be very much alive.

LOL! They never, ever get it. They actually believe this "shoot to wound" shit from movies and TV.

Speaking of understanding, I got to teach a lesson to Little Darling yesterday about concealed carry. I was explaining to LD why it took so long for me to get to the St Pete Pier. I was riding my bicycle down to meet up with her when three large males were menacing a homeless person on the Pinellas Trail. She wanted to know, basically if I had pulled up like a cowboy and fended them off. I explained to her that since they hadn't actually struck the victim yet, my entering the scene might have escalated the situation making it necessary to shoot and that that was not the objective.

However, as usual I was not disappointed in the uselessness of 911. I stopped a few hundred feet around the corner from this situation and called 911 and gave her the basics "three men attacking a homeless guy on Pinellas Trail east of 34th Street. Apparently the 911 operator decided this needed to go to St Pete nonemergency, so there was that delay, and I had to repeat the situation for St Pete nonemergency. Here is the part which is infuriating.

"There are three large young black males menacing a homeless person on the Pinellas Trail just east of 34th Street."

"North or south?" (The Pinellas Trail is a railway line and doesn't cross 28th street north, any local police operator should be familiar with this transit route)

"South."

"At what avenue?" (Again, the Pinellas trail is its own avenue, it's a fucking railway line.)

"There is no avenue, it's the Pinellas Trail."

"I understand that, sir, but I need a cross street." (As I write this I see the problem: she's filling in the blanks on a computer screen and can't adapt to a situation where that doesn't apply.)

"The Pinellas Trail is the cross street, they are on the trail."

"Sir, I need to know what avenue so I can direct the officers."

"Never mind." and I hung up.

I take responsibility for my aggravation in this situation- I should have stuck with my policy of calling up, stating the problem and location and hanging up.

She called me back a minute or two later, with a different attitude, having apparently had the Pinellas Trail explained to her by someone else there, and simply asked me to describe the suspects. Mind you I am now stopped, on my bicycle, in front of a blight zone house where these guys or their cousins might live. But she did say that the officers had someone they were talking to.

While you were hanging yourself , on someone else's words
Dying to believe in what you heard
I was staring straight into the shining sun

Which is why a taser was implemented in the first place. Of course lost on the nova's of the world is if the woman would have stayed still and accepted responsibility for what she had done, she'd still be very much alive.

Yes, but responsibility isn't in the liberal lexicon.

Originally Posted by Novaheart

Speaking of understanding, I got to teach a lesson to Little Darling yesterday about concealed carry. I was explaining to LD why it took so long for me to get to the St Pete Pier. I was riding my bicycle down to meet up with her when three large males were menacing a homeless person on the Pinellas Trail. She wanted to know, basically if I had pulled up like a cowboy and fended them off. I explained to her that since they hadn't actually struck the victim yet, my entering the scene might have escalated the situation making it necessary to shoot and that that was not the objective.

Ouch. I tend to think in terms of FMJ rounds, because that's what we use (hollow points are actually banned by the GC), but that's another issue. Everybody is taught to shoot COM, because it's the largest target and has the most vital organs. The odds of a miss increase dramatically when you try to shoot limbs, and the odds on stopping someone also drop dramatically. You can cause permanent damage, but you may not end up doing enough damage to keep them from killing someone or escaping. You don't casually shoot people to wound them, because the moment that you engage with a firearm, you are using lethal force. If the effects are less than lethal, it's usually not for want of trying.

DUmmies think that bullets are like phasers that can be set to "stun".

t is significant that the man Clinton turns to for military advice ---who argued against the tanks and APC's for the raid in Mogadishu---is the same Warren Christopher (then a high official in Jimmy Carter's National Security Council) who helped plan the disastrous raid to rescue the hostages in Iran.

At a planning session for the Tehran rescue, the man selected to lead the raid, the late Colonel Charlie Beckwith, was asked what the would do about the Iranian guards. Bechwith, a no-nonsense veteran of special operations, replied that as they came out the door they would be shot in the head---twice---to be sure they couldn't do any harm.

Warren Christopher gasped, grimaced, viscerally shocked, and asked, "Couldn't you just shoot them in the hand?"

No, he saves that for posters who get mouthy. :D

Police use hollow point rounds in the interest of public safety. Having the bullet fragment easier on impact means less possibility of full penetration and hitting innocent bystanders.

We in the military aren't as concerned about that. At the same time the GC tries to keep war "clean" and FMJ rounds are more likely to achieve a smooth penetration, which are easier to have docs patch up. Having our rounds shatter inside of the body pretty much assures there is no hope.

It's funny that our nations enemies are in a way afforded more protection then street thugs trying to car jack someone.

In most sports, cold-cocking an opposing player repeatedly in the face with a series of gigantic Slovakian uppercuts would get you a multi-game suspension without pay.

In hockey, it means you have to sit in the penalty box for five minutes.

I have always found that mentioning "I thought I heard shots fired" usually get their attention in a true emergency situation.

I don't want to lie to them, but I would understand. Each time I have called them as a good citizen or a storekeeper, they have made me sorry I bothered. So I decided that from how on I would simply call, state the problem and the location and hang up. I have done that in the past, but this time I forgot.

While you were hanging yourself , on someone else's words
Dying to believe in what you heard
I was staring straight into the shining sun